I read this trying to get an overview of Tudor food, which generally, this book offers. There are a lot of recipes, both modern versions and older, hiI read this trying to get an overview of Tudor food, which generally, this book offers. There are a lot of recipes, both modern versions and older, historically accurate versions. The author also attempts to give background and explanations for many dishes to put them in context.
But I do have a few complaints. First, some of the recipes are from much later, (including after 1800) while a lot of the earlier recipes don't have any translations for the archaic English. I can read some 1300s English, but there are a number of words that I don't know offhand. I'll have to go and look up all those words at a later time, so that's kind of a pain.
There was also a bit of repetition, with a recipe presented and then an almost exact version written under it from a much later date. I suppose that is okay to show how it remained popular, but I wasn't reading this for a history of English food throughout time, just the Tudor era.
I also wanted more of a section on drinks. That was the shortest section with the fewest recipes, when I know there are more drinks than that, and would've wanted more explanations and varities shown.
Overall, this was a decent presentation of food from the Tudor era, and it's interesting that the author tried to make some of them more accessible for the modern foodie, but I think there could have been a few alterations to make it easier and more accurate....more
I liked that this book included several different sources of information that I haven't come across in other places. I've already read a lot of ElizabI liked that this book included several different sources of information that I haven't come across in other places. I've already read a lot of Elizabethan documents, so it's good that there were only a few here that I already found elsewhere. The scope of the topics was also pretty decent, although some sections should have been shorter and others longer. Campion's piece was WAY too long for how densely written is was, so that part really, really dragged for me. There was another one later on that was also too long and uninteresting. I would have preferred a bit more information on clothes or outward appearances, and less on religious debate.
I also thought there was just a bit too much emphasis on finding erotic documents. There was a pretty strong focus on it toward the middle of this, and while it was funny at first, it started to get tedious.
Overall, I think this is a good supplement for Elizabethan popular culture. Combining it with a few other books with primary sources would give a reader a pretty good idea of the type of place Elizabeth England was....more
I think what I like best about this book is the author's enthusiasm for the subject material. I could definitely tell that she really cared about the I think what I like best about this book is the author's enthusiasm for the subject material. I could definitely tell that she really cared about the subject. The author also was able to describe events in such a way as to make them more vivid and realistic. The combination made this, for the most part, a very engrossing read compared to many other historical books. This is obviously a popular history, not something aimed at history majors, but it is also exactly how I think popular history should be written.
I also liked how the author gave the reader a clearer picture of many of the historical figures involved. I had read about Drake before and come across descriptions in popular culture, but I definitely learned about a new side to him. He seemed to be extremely honorable for someone whose motives were money and revenge. (I also don't even know who he is, but I instantly liked the captain from the introductory chapter).
There were a few inaccuracies, some exaggerations and some events were kind of glossed over, but it wasn't bad enough for me to doubt the accuracy of the author's information. Most of the inaccuracies were minor and weren't included to sway the reader, but more likely the author came across incorrect information and didn't realize it.
Overall, I think this book was very informative while still interesting to read. It gives a good overview of the origins of the age of pirates and England's change in direction toward empire. ...more
I really have to give this two stars because of the strong and obvious bias of the author, and also the number of inaccuracies I came across.
William AI really have to give this two stars because of the strong and obvious bias of the author, and also the number of inaccuracies I came across.
William Allen left England because he was a Catholic? He left to be a priest and was involved in divers plots against the English government. The author also states several times that Catholics were killed for their faith under Elizabeth, when really they had to be breaking another law also to be executed.
"squalid affair with Anne Boleyn"? There was no sexual encounter until a few months before they got married, his frustration at her withholding it helped push him.
The author also claimed that Philip II encouraged the execution of non-Catholics. Philip actually told Mary NOT to execute her subjects since it would seem like it came from him a foreigner coming in and killing Englishmen.
I thought Sidney was shot on the third charge, not the second. And I haven't heard that he's considered a wrong turn in English poetry, I've only come across the opposite.
Eleanor Bull didn't run a tavern, it was a private house where sometimes men would meet up. She was wealthy and related to the Cecils.
Mentioned twice in two pages that hack writer was not a profession. Yes, I get it.
Overall, the author might be passionate about the subject matter but he makes it too obvious how he feels and colors everything with his own strong viewpoint. I also think that a little more research instead of relying on popular misconceptions would've made the book more informative and accurate....more
I think overall this was really too short. I would've liked more detail. The author could've described the feast days that he deliberately excluded, oI think overall this was really too short. I would've liked more detail. The author could've described the feast days that he deliberately excluded, or how some things changed over the decades. It also mostly covered the middle of Henry VIII's reign, not the entire Tudor Era. It was kind of a snapshot of a fictional single day in the late 1530s, if the title had been something more specific to that then I would probably be less disappointed....more
I read this just because it was about Sir Philip Sidney, I didn't realize exactly how technical and scholarly it was going to be. I had to stop readinI read this just because it was about Sir Philip Sidney, I didn't realize exactly how technical and scholarly it was going to be. I had to stop reading several times to look up different poetry terms that I was completely unfamiliar with. I also had a hard time with how the author judged poetry; I've never been that excited about poetry and I can tell what I like and don't like but judging it objectively is something I really can't do.
There were a few inaccuracies in the book, such as about Louise de Coligny - her first husband wasn't the Coligny that was assassinated, that was her father, she married first de Teligny.
Overall, this is a good examination of the development of late Renaissance English poetry, but really aimed at English majors....more
I have to give some credit to this book for mostly sticking to the time period in its title. Often when reading something that says "Elizabethan" theyI have to give some credit to this book for mostly sticking to the time period in its title. Often when reading something that says "Elizabethan" they usually also mean early Stuart. The author referenced the 1600s at various times but didn't go into depth, and none of the cases specially profiled occurred after 1603.
While the wording was, at times, very scholarly, it wasn't a difficult book to get through. The author made sure to hook the reader in the beginning of each chapter before going into a more technical and scholarly examination of the underlying motives and themes and their importance.
Overall, I thought this was a really decent examination of possession in Elizabethan England....more
So the title is a tad misleading since it starts off about that but then sort of veers off into disputes between English Catholics abroad and EuropeanSo the title is a tad misleading since it starts off about that but then sort of veers off into disputes between English Catholics abroad and European Catholics' involvement. And I actually really liked the first quarter of the book or so, it gave me some information I hadn't heard and helped me look on the situation of loyal English Catholics in a different light. However, the sections on the various word battles between Catholic priestly factions got to be tedious toward the end. I would have preferred if the author stuck more to the substance of the title and less on Bagshaw butting heads with Parsons and Allen.
I do have to give the author credit though. I'm pretty sure he sympathizes with the Catholics over Anglicans, but unlike other such authors, he didn't make it glaringly obvious. He was pretty fair throughout, although there were occasions where his word choice did start to indicate which side in any debate that he favored. It's really unusual for an author of this subject matter to not completely demonize the opposition, but maybe since the book was created out of his doctoral thesis, he had to be more evenhanded.
Overall, this was a pretty decent book for learning about the differences in opinion held by Elizabethan Catholics, especially late in her reign....more
Honestly, I didn't really learn all that much here that I didn't already know. I'm not a huge expert on Ralegh, but most of the information presented Honestly, I didn't really learn all that much here that I didn't already know. I'm not a huge expert on Ralegh, but most of the information presented could be obtained from other sources or even just common knowledge. There were a few things that I didn't know much about, but the author should have done more to flesh them out - like Ralegh's involvement with the Earl of Oxford and his circle.
I also didn't like how the book ended at 1587, with a very wishy-washy message of "well they drifted apart after that". I still would've liked to get to the end of his career at court, or Elizabeth's death. I really thought when I finished that chapter there would be more, but that was the end. It's very strange for a biography to cutoff like that before everything is over or before one or both subjects are dead.
Overall, it was a decently written biography, but nothing special....more
This isn't my first Walsingham bio so reading this was just to fill in any information that I hadn't got in previous books. There were a few instancesThis isn't my first Walsingham bio so reading this was just to fill in any information that I hadn't got in previous books. There were a few instances where I did find out something new, but mostly the information here is available in any other Walsingham biography.
I liked that Walsingham's time in France was portrayed more thoroughly than it usually is, but his involvement with Mary Stuart was really glossed over and the author became extremely speculative. I would've liked more grounded arguments in that chapter and more details and explanation.
My biggest complaint is the very apparent bias against Queen Elizabeth. It's ok to not like a historical person (I really hate several myself) but you're supposed to control that when you're writing nonfiction. This author just made it too obvious that he thought she really shouldn't have even been queen. Several times information is presented that is open to interpretation but the author treats it as though it points to only his thinking. That's especially true of the later chapters.
Overall, this is a mid-tier Walsingham biography, informative but strongly biased....more
While this was marginally better than the first book, it still suffered from some of the same issues. The word "sardonic" comes up 18 times, compared While this was marginally better than the first book, it still suffered from some of the same issues. The word "sardonic" comes up 18 times, compared to the setting "London" which appears 35 times. That really, really, shouldn't be how the numbers add up. Sardonic should be used sparingly, not as a go-to term for being a little spicy. I was joking that I should do a drinking game with this series where I only drink for the word, I would still get very drunk trying it.
I'm also very much over how "the planes of their face" get mentioned constantly. So maybe my complaint with the language is that it's like an author of romances tried to write historical fiction but didn't alter her writing style. I can see "sardonic" being mentioned a lot in a romance, as well as facial planes, and constant references to being "hard and soft".
Again, there were random idioms and slang thrown in to try to make it feel more authentic but only made it seemed forced. It wasn't quite to the same extent as the previous book, but still enough for me to notice, especially compared to other Regency era books.
The mystery was a little harder to figure out this time, and the author did actually attempt to throw off the reader by doing the opposite of what she did in the first book. So the mystery wasn't telegraphed, but neither was it the most unexpected or interesting outcome.
Honestly, again a lot of my issues with the book come down to the editing. There was even a typo in my ebook around 12% in. I kind of want to shake the editor and ask what she's actually been doing since she's not doing her job as she should. The editor really seems to have dropped the ball pretty badly in regard to picking up repetitive word usage, reining in the author when they go too far, and making sure there are no accidental mistakes.
Overall, it was an okay read. Charlotte can get annoying, but she's really too reserved to be that bad. Really, none of the characters are awful, it's just that none are great. (I still see potential in Sheffield, but as usual he was under-utilized.) I'll probably read the next book, just not with any real excitement....more
Overall, I thought this was a decent book. However, I had some issues with it that definitely prevent me from considering four stars.
I feel like thisOverall, I thought this was a decent book. However, I had some issues with it that definitely prevent me from considering four stars.
I feel like this was in desperate need of a competent editor, because whoever actually got their hands on it missed several very glaring issues. "Sardonic" is used WAY too many times. It's alright to use it a few times, but halfway into the book, I had already come across it at least five times. Then there was the overabundance of Regency slang. The author was clearly trying to add some color to the world she was working in, but to me, it felt very unnatural and forced. A good editor would have advised her to cut some of that out and make it flow a little better. There are also some anachronistic parts, such as calling the States a "country" in 1650. Until 1776 the North American colonies were considered part of Britain, someone coming over to England from there wouldn't be seen as a person traveling to a different country. In the early 1800s they were different, but for an obviously educated person like Charlotte to refer to it that way wasn't right.
Another slight problem is that before I got halfway through the book I was certain I knew who the murderer was, and I was right. I don't know the last time I figured everything out so quickly. It was a little disappointing, but not necessarily a deal breaker.
I also wasn't keen on the street kids. I think that they are a way overused cliche character for 1800s England, and they weren't done with any more originality or personality than the usual examples. I honestly thought they only dragged down the pacing, and failed at humanizing Charlotte or any of the other characters. Pretty much the same with the Bow Street Runner, who tried to have a little personality toward the end but fell flat.
The one character I did like was Sheffield, and that was mainly because I like that trope of the useless aristocrat who is actually way more observant and clever than they let on. (I was really equating him with Gu Yong-ha from Sungkyunkwan Scandal). He still didn't get enough development, though, and I would've liked him as a more major character in order to spice things up.
Despite my complaints, I feel that a lot of the problems came down to editing and growing pains. The second book could be better, or it could be worse, but I am gambling on the former. It seems like there is potential for something better.
(view spoiler)[ ***One last note: a lot of reviewers don't see the romance between the two leads. It's there, and kind of obvious, they just don't say the words or act on it. It's clear that that's the direction their relationship is heading. (hide spoiler)]...more
Despite already having read a few guides to Elizabethan London, this one managed to have some new information. I was reading this to go over what I knDespite already having read a few guides to Elizabethan London, this one managed to have some new information. I was reading this to go over what I knew and to see if the author had a different insight into the city. I didn't expect to find extra information but was glad to.
Other than that, it's a pretty decently written overview, but I think I would have liked it more if it was even more in-depth. Some of the topics aren't addressed very thoroughly and the section on foreigners did go on too long with unnecessary information (but that was helpful for me, so really only an issue for casual readers) that was too specific....more
Apparently this book is represented as salacious - which it really is not. I didn't decide to read it for that reason so I wasn't disappointed. I do tApparently this book is represented as salacious - which it really is not. I didn't decide to read it for that reason so I wasn't disappointed. I do think that there could have been more cases since there were so many murders occurring in the many years from Henry VIII (could have started with VII) to Elizabeth. Some of the cases are among the more famous from the period so I was already familiar with them but there were a few that were new to me and just as weird as Tudor crime seems to always be.
Overall, it's interesting if you have an interest in history - especially if that's paired with an interest in true crime....more
This was okay as an overview, but it was often repetitive and oversimplified events. I also think some more important aspects were glossed over while This was okay as an overview, but it was often repetitive and oversimplified events. I also think some more important aspects were glossed over while less important topics were covered too heavily. I'd use this more as a quick reference and probably try another book on Drake to really get the story of what happened....more
Overall, I really liked this book. I think the author did a good job of being fair and balanced with both the Queen of Scots and Elizabeth - that's usOverall, I really liked this book. I think the author did a good job of being fair and balanced with both the Queen of Scots and Elizabeth - that's usually not possible for most historians who have to very clearly pick a side. I also thought that the way that their lives are shown side by side as time progressed kept everything in perspective, and I could really see how events progressed on both sides.
There were a few parts where the language was cliched or just odd and a few kind of nonsensical sentences that are concentrated toward the end. But those weren't huge issues, and I would consider this to be one of the better books on the subject....more
The title of the book is a little misleading for what the book actually is: a sarcastic overview of Elizabeth's reign with some anecdotes included. AsThe title of the book is a little misleading for what the book actually is: a sarcastic overview of Elizabeth's reign with some anecdotes included. As a broad overview, it actually isn't too bad but it wasn't what I was expecting. However, I think that the sarcastic tone and constant puns and jokes that weren't at all funny and detract from the material rather than spice it up. It's pretty clear that the author sides with the Catholics of Elizabethan England and he seems to disdain Elizabeth herself. Also, there were several parts where the author presents incorrect information - based on hearsay or just so over-simplified as to not be completely accurate. The wording of the section on William Parry makes it seem as though he committed treason in the beginning of 1584 when he technically did it at the end of the year (March 1584 but would be Mar 1585 not using the Elizabethan system of beginning the year at the end of March.) His account of the Babington Plot had several inaccuracies, as did the description of Marlowe's death. Overall, the author does a decent job of showing the timeline of Elizabeth's reign, but the sarcastic tone, flat attempts at humor and blatant inaccuracies make it a not very reliable source of specific information....more
This honestly felt like reading a really long thesis. There was a lot of good information, but it didn't flow very well and got tedious at parts. I alThis honestly felt like reading a really long thesis. There was a lot of good information, but it didn't flow very well and got tedious at parts. I also thought it focused mostly on the late Stuart era (which wasn't why I decided to read it) rather than fully encompassing early modern England. It's also definitely aimed at historians and history students since much of the language wouldn't be familiar unless you've already taken some college-level history, so I would recommend for someone just curious about the subject....more
Ubiquitousbastard
>
Books:
history
(211)
Loading...
